Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

CCXG Global Forum March 2018, Common timeframes by Diana Barba

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 8 Ad

More Related Content

Similar to CCXG Global Forum March 2018, Common timeframes by Diana Barba (20)

Advertisement

More from OECD Environment (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Advertisement

CCXG Global Forum March 2018, Common timeframes by Diana Barba

  1. 1. COMMON TIMEFRAMES DIANA CAROLINA BARBA GLOBAL FORUM ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE CCXG OECD
  2. 2. What are the options for common timeframes?
  3. 3. Why common timeframes are important and needed? Periodicity and effectiveness: the Paris Agreement’s Architecture is based on elements with a certain periodicity such as the GST and the communication of NDCs (every 5 years). To ensure the proper functioning of this architecture, the implementation timing of NDCs must be consistent with that periodicity. Achieving consistency is crucial to ensure the provision of a timely, comparable and objective frame of reference (as a result of periodic collective review of efforts) to indicate all Parties how subsequent action under the Agreement should be updated or enhanced, in a nationally determined manner. Also, it reduces the risk of free-riders and of locking-in a level of ambition that fails to deliver on the required trajectories to achieve the Agreements long – term goals.
  4. 4. Options 5 years 10 years Consistent with timeframes of some important elements of the ambition mechanism (i.e. GST). More chance of making technical and fundamental adjustments (even on the level of ambition) without undermining transparency and consistency of tracking the progress in the implementing NDCs. More time to prepare and conduct a consultation process necessary to approve and communicatethe subsequent NDCs. Many challenges for the national process of formulation and implementation of NDC Higher probability of locking-in a low level of ambition Lag between communication and the implementation period will be increasingly larger.
  5. 5. 20252020 2030 10 years lag 5 years lag 15 years lag 2035 2040 NDC 2 NDC 3 NDC 4 2045 10 YEARS TIMEFRAME- LAG BETWEEN COMMMUNICATION AND STARTING DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD (COMMUNICATION OF NDC 2) (COMMUNICATION OF NDC 3) (COMMUNICATION OF NDC 4) 2050 2055
  6. 6. • Some parties are concerned about challenges of having a short NDC implementation period but it is important to bear in mind that: • We are not going to formulate subsequent NDCs from scratch. • The process of preparing new NDCs will be a continuous process based on the experience and capacities acquired by the Parties. • Even the consultation process to national actors should not be as cumbersome as it was the first time. • Using long term goals under low carbon development strategies as a reference could facilitate the formulation process of the NDCs.
  7. 7. 5 YEARS TIMEFRAME COULD BE A MORE SUITABLE OPTION…
  8. 8. A FINAL MESSAGE… • It is necessary that the CMA consider the common time frames in light of what is needed to deliver the collective goals under the Paris Agreement instead of having discussions based on what we did in the past. iNDCs An experiment created before the adoption of the Paris Agreement

×